KVR Audio

Funkybot · Post by **Funkybot** » Sun May 15, 2005 11:53 pm

Is anyone with access to a nice set of plug-in EQs up for doing an A/B test? I'm particularly interested in seeing whether or not the URS EQs are worth it when compared to commercial native EQs (Kjaerhus, Voxengo, Elemental Audio, Hyrdratone, UAD-1, etc). It seems that for this test all you'd need are a few good start tracks (I'd like to see acoustic guitar, bass, and a full mix) and simply set the Q to the same amount as well as setting the same amount of gain per band. So anyone with a good selection of EQs down for this?

martian · Post by **martian** » Mon May 16, 2005 12:47 am

different eqs have different 'strengths' at each freq range, most likely everyone will jus prefer the loudest, much better to match them up by percieved level, as close as you possibly can.

some (usually the goods ones) you jus wont be able to match up with other eqs, cause they jus have a v differnet tone.

akisd28 · Post by **akisd28** » Mon May 16, 2005 1:40 am

I have the URS ones (VST), as well as TC EqSat, Sony Oxford, UAD-1 w/Pultec Pro. The thing is I can only upload 128kbps .mp3 files at my space in SoundClick, unless someone can provide me some space for that.

I guess I could try the Auditorium, huh? Do you know what's the procedure to upload the files there? Should I contact someone or just sign up for an account?

Funkybot · Post by **Funkybot** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:13 am

I've got PSP MasterQ, Eqium, and the Timeworks EQ from Sonar 2, (I think I had the Kjaerhus EQ but lost the reg, gotta contact Torben bout that one). Anyone know about the auditorium, and how we go about posting files or how we need to ask? Also anyone willing to provide some source files, or help in setting up what the parameters should be for the most fair test?

bobby yarrow · Post by **bobby yarrow** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:26 am

This kind of test isn't as useful as you might think, as wm said. I could do a bunch of passes with different eqs on a high shelf or something, but I just don't think it would be an eye-opener. Better to do something like "bring up the wood in this el gtr" or "get some sparkle in this vocal" with a bunch of eqs. Each one would need different setting, and the results would be different, but might better showcase the strenghts of each one.

To me, it sounds like a pain in the ass, but maybe somebody else will feel like doing it.

I'll also that, for me, a big part of the value of an eq is not just whether it can get me there, but where it can me there fast. It's also really damn hard to figure out whether or not it's getting it right outside the context of a full mix. All that to say, I sure love demos.

RAYA · Post by **RAYA** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:33 am

You should post a little tune not mastered with tone deffects for the guys to fix it with them eq gears I think.

akisd28 · Post by **akisd28** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:36 am

The kind of "bring up the wood in this el gtr" test relies a lot on the skills of the engineer, so I think it'd be better if one could post examples with exact same settings on different EQs, along with the source file of course.

Of course, I agree that different EQs are more suitable for different things and that a big part of this is due to the interface (how fast it'll get you there etc.), but that's what demos are for.

Funkybot · Post by **Funkybot** » Mon May 16, 2005 3:02 am

Yeah, I don't see how something completely vague is going to work in a test like this. But I think running a 6-10db boost on both high and low shelves over a full mix would give you a really good idea of how an EQ sounds (whether the end result itself actually sounded good). Same thing for an acoustic guitar or something, why not just perform a cut at 100hz with a set Q value and then boost at 5k with a set Q value, and see how the different EQs stack up against one another. Again who cares whether these would be the exact boosts/cuts we'd make in a mix, as long as we're setting controls for a comparison? I can understand trying to approximate sounds without focussing set controls when attempting to A/B reverbs, but wouldn't this be the only really fair way to compare several EQs? Mind you, this is also why I'm suggesting we use different bits of source material with different set settings for each.

As far as ease of use and interface goes, well, we'll have to leave that up to other people. I think the only focus of such a test should be the sound.

Here are the EQ's I'd like to hear in this test:

URS Fultec
URS N-Series
UAD-1 Pultec
Sonalksis' SV-517
Sony Oxford EQ
Kjaerhus' Golden EQ
PSP's MasterQ
Voxengo's HarmoniEQ
Sonic Timework's EQ (the one from Sonar 2.2XL)
Elemental Audio's Eqium
Tritone Digital's Hydratone

Did I miss any big one's that people would like to see? As you can see I've included some DSP based EQs because I'd be interesting to hear how they stack up to native EQs. Also I'm avoiding Linear Phase EQ's.

fgfab · Post by **fgfab** » Mon May 16, 2005 11:08 am

Funkybot wrote: Did I miss any big one's that people would like to see?

Maybe the Q-Metric ? Personnaly I like it !

There's the TL-Audio EQ-1 too, but too limited because it don't have a tunable Q.

stefancrs · Post by **stefancrs** » Mon May 16, 2005 11:21 am

And NyquistEQ

martian · Post by **martian** » Mon May 16, 2005 12:25 pm

the quickest test would jus be a big high end boost at about 7-8k. you'll need to do say a boast of 8db on one then match up all the others by percieved volume.

crank the volume up on your monitors put your head close to them and flick between the eqs, it'll be clear which sound like shit, jus compare them to hydratone.

i've tried many appart from the URS stuff, like to know how they compare.

sangha · Post by **sangha** » Mon May 16, 2005 12:56 pm

Funkybot wrote:Did I miss any big one's that people would like to see? As you can see I've included some DSP based EQs because I'd be interesting to hear how they stack up to native EQs. Also I'm avoiding Linear Phase EQ's.

UAD-1 Cambridge

Funkybot · Post by **Funkybot** » Mon May 16, 2005 1:08 pm

Sangha the reason I didn't include the Cambridge is because from everything I've read from people who've compared it to the Oxford say it's nearly identical to the point where flipping the phase on the two will produce silence. At least, that's what other people have said.

So ok, we have a good list of EQs here, anyone want to help out with source files, and a place to host?

smart · Post by **smart** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:06 pm

T-RackS EQ too

bobby yarrow · Post by **bobby yarrow** » Mon May 16, 2005 2:08 pm

Felt I was bratty before, and I'm a little too whatever to work on anything else this morning, so I did a little eq sample pack. Don't know how useful it is; see for yourself.

The files are at www.theyarrows.com/eqtest

I put the dry file up, cause you want to hear it, but also in case anybody else wants a go. I did all the eq prints off the mp3, not off the original .wav file, so the field is level.

It's a section of acoustic guitar. The target was, high-pass at 110 with as much cut as I could get; high shelf at 8K, Q of 1, +3db; and, bump of 5 db at 3.2K, fairly narrow.

Almost every EQ required some deviation from the target. The pultec was toughest, as the numbers don't line up with anything and there's no high shelf. I ran 2 instances and did what I could.

The test up there are:

Avalon 737 (hardware)
UAD Pultec
URS N
TC EQSat
PSP MasterQ

If anybody wants to add more, email me at bobby at theyarrows dot com and I'll put them up.

Cheers.

Anyone Up For An EQ A/B test?